There is nothing illegal about the president’s taking advantage of this tax shelter, but it does raise eyebrows given that he has lamented the myriad tax exemptions used by the wealthy—“millionaires and billionaires” – like himself—to pay less in taxes. He has yet to propose a comprehensive plan to reform the byzantine tax code.
The Obamas paid a total federal tax rate of 20.5 percent on a gross adjusted income $789,674, which would typically fall within the top federal rate of 35 percent. According to an analysis of the president’s tax return, Obama may have paid a lower rate than his secretary despite making more than eight times as much money as she did.
But Carl Fillichio, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis’ top communications advisor, circulated a memo earlier this week to interested media informing them that everybody is being required to re-submit their credentials requests.
Fillichio reminded participants that there are only 20-30 seats available and that priority will be given by DOL in selecting participants to those that “are primarily journalistic enterprises.”
He also offered a one-sentence assurance that “the department will not consider editorial or political viewpoints in making credentialing decisions.”
Guy goes into a bar in Louisiana where there’s a robot bartender!
The robot says, “What will you have?”
The guy says, “Whiskey.”
The robot brings back his drink and says to the man, “What’s your IQ?”
The guy says, “168.”
The robot then proceeds to talk about physics, space, exploration and medical technology.
The guy leaves, . . . but he is curious . . . So he goes back into the bar.
The robot bartender says, “What will you have?”
The guy says, “Whiskey.”
Again, the robot brings the man his drink and says, “What’s your IQ?”
The guy says, “100.”
The robot then starts to talk about Nascar, Budweiser, the Saints and LSU Tigers
The guy leaves, but finds this very interesting, so he thinks he will try it one more time.
He goes back into the bar.
The robot says, “What will you have?”
The guy says, “Whiskey,” and the robot brings him his whiskey.
The robot then says, “What’s your IQ?
The guy says, “Uh, about 50.”
The robot leans in real close and says,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
“So, . . . you people still happy with Barack Obama?”
NASA Administrator Charles Bolden is a graduate of the Naval Academy, a retired, highly decorated Marine major general, and a former astronaut. Bolden is also a dutiful politician.
NASA’s website cites the agency’s aim to “pioneer the future in space exploration and aeronautic research” and outlines its “vision”: “To reach for new heights and reveal the unknown so that what we do and learn will benefit all humankind.”
There is no mention anywhere on the NASA site of getting involved international politics, such as improving relations with Islam, or promoting the global warming scam but both are on its agenda.
Bolden demonstrated that NASA’s mission had radically changed a year after he was named administrator when he said during an interview with Al Jazeera, the Arabic language news network. Under Bolden, NASA’s is being politicized and its “foremost” mission is to improve relations with the Muslim world, and not space exploration or aeronautic research.
He told Al Jazeera that he was “ordered” to effectively forget NASA’s historic mission of space pioneering, etc. and to adopt a totally new and markedly different goal. As Bolden admitted to the voice of Islam, “Obama wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science. . . and math and engineering.”
At the behest of his boss, Bolden was abandoning NASA’s position as the world’s pre-eminent scientific body in order to serve “foremost” as cheerleaders for ancient Muslim achievements, that is, to fulfill Barack Hussein Obama’s political ambition to suck up to Islam and help Muslims “feel good” about themselves.
That extreme departure contradicted the president’s own words spoken in March, 2009.
At that time, he said, “Let’s be clear: promoting science isn’t just about providing resources–it is also about protecting free and open inquiry. It is about letting scientists . . . do their jobs, . . . It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda–and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology.”
Except when those decisions and facts conflict with Obama’s ideology.
NASA has again departed from its mission on another Obama pet issue–the lie of anthropogenic global warming. . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=21481.)
This affidavit is not law, it is agitprop: invoking, for example, the explosive term “profiled” but carefully avoiding any discussion of what it means and failing to note that (a) there is no evidence of racial profiling, and (b) absent an invidious racial component there is nothing wrong with profiling (indeed, we want police to do it so that innocent people don’t get hassled).
You listening, lao?
Additional points:
1) The dispatcher did not TELL Zimmerman not to follow Martin, but even if he had, Zimmerman was under no requirement to listen even though, if you follow the 911 tape, you find he apparently did – just after the dispatcher suggested (did not DEMAND, he SUGGESTED) Zimmerman not follow Martin, Zimmerman began to return to his vehicle.
2) Failure to share Zimmerman’s statements suggests there’s information in them that is damaging to the prosecution. The affidavit also fails to mention the physical evidence: Zimmerman’s injuries. Both of these help explain why the prosecutor chose not to let a jury decide whether or not to go forward.
3) The affidavit stays away from the tricky question regarding who started the physical altercation – all the evidence suggests Martin did and any evidence to the contrary should have been clearly laid out in the affidavit, yet it was not, suggesting there is no such evidence.
4) As the source states:
“Zimmerman confronted Martin [note the active voice is used when nothing criminal is claimed -- "confronting" someone is not a crime] and a struggle ensued” [as if the struggle, presumably meaning the physical encounter, happened spontaneously -- no one is identified as initiating it]. If I ask, “What are you doing?” and you respond by punching me in the nose, and this leads us to grapple, my having confronted you does not alter the fact that you are responsible for the ensuing struggle.
This is a point I made earlier. There is no evidence Zimmerman confronted Martin – in fact the evidence suggests the opposite.
5) A key lie in the affidavit has to do with trying to falsely establish that Martin called for help. Both Zimmerman’s own account and the one actual eyewitness have already clearly established that Zimmerman was on the ground, calling for help, while Martin was trying to murder him. Here again we see why the prosecutor decided not to send this to a jury – the forensics will show that Zimmerman’s account is correct – that Martin was on top of him and attempting to murder him when Zimmerman shot him.
6) Prosecutors actually have to identify a specific charge and present evidence that establishes probable cause for each essential element the legislature has prescribed in defining that charge.
The affidavit contains NO probable cause for ANY essential element.
…one thing I can say with confidence is that there is not probable cause in that affidavit for the charge the prosecutor has selected, second-degree murder. It requires proof of depraved indifference to human life. Nothing in the affidavit, and nothing we otherwise know about Zimmerman, indicates such a state of mind — and it’s really not close.
At best the prosecutor is hoping that the jury will come back with a lesser included offense, it seems, if this even makes it to trial. I’m certain they’re hoping for a plea bargain with Zimmerman.
Even the following charges would be a reach, under the circumstances:
Florida law makes causing the death of a person under the age of 18 manslaughter, provided there has been “culpable negligence.” It also criminalizes as manslaughter the “unnecessary killing” of a person in order to resist or prevent that person’s violation of law (e.g., the use of lethal force to repel a clearly non-lethal threat).
Neither of these charges would have been a slam-dunk; indeed, they’d be losers if Zimmerman shot because he was justifiably in fear of his life.
And, clearly, he did!
If I were a cynic, I’d say that an ambitious special prosecutor — exploiting the rabble-rousing of the U.S. attorney general and the racial grievance industry — filed an exceedingly serious charge for which she lacks evidence, second degree murder, in order to bask in the mob’s adulation while pressuring Zimmerman to plead guilty to a lesser charge, manslaughter, on which the special prosecutor runs a high risk of losing if Zimmerman forces a trial.
As the baby boomers retire and health costs continue to grow, more revenues will be needed. For Democrats who have spent the last decade convincing members of the middle class that they will forever be exempt from tax increases, thats going to be a tough about-face to make.
If there is a bright spot, it is that Obama and the Democrats, to their credit, are willing to break their pledge. They effectively raised future taxes on people making less than $250,000 when they passed the excise tax on high-value health- insurance plans as part of health-care reform, for instance. During the debate on Obamacare there were numerous denials that taxes would be raised on the middle class.” NOW, it turns out that those claims are inoperative…and the tax increases are actually a feature, not a bug! AND, they are ALL lying! They are willing to break their pledge that only the rich will pay increased taxes!…and THAT is a feature now, not a bug!
Unbelievable…the double talk, sophistry, outright lying and slippery bad faith of the left cannot be overstated.
The Liberal Misappropriation of a Conservative President Of all the unlikely developments in American politics over the last two decades, the most astonishing is this: liberals suddenly love Ronald Reagan. They have taken to celebrating certain virtues they claim Reagan possessed—virtues they believe are absent from the conservative body politic today—while looking back with nostalgia at the supposed civility of the political struggles of the 1980s.
Obama: Let’s Call Tax Plan the ‘Reagan Rule’ President Barack Obama trod new ground in invoking Republican Party icon Ronald Reagan to pitch his proposal to raise taxes on the wealthy. Mr. Obama puckishly offered Wednesday to rename his proposal, currently called the “Buffett rule” after billionaire investor Warren Buffett, the “Reagan rule” if that might help persuade Republicans to support it.
President Obama: Quoting Reagan out of context The world has gone topsy-turvy when a Democratic president approvingly cites Ronald Reagan on tax policy — and even suggests naming his legislative proposal after the Republican icon, since, as Obama put it, he “traveled across the country pushing for the same concept.”
Obama is talking about the so-called “Buffett Rule,” which seeks to raise the taxes of the super wealthy so they don’t pay less than middle-class Americans. We have examined this concept earlier and concluded it was more of a “political argument” than an actual problem. (White House documents show just 22,000 wealthy households make more than $1 million and pay less than 15 percent of their income in taxes.) But no matter — a version is coming up for a vote next week in the Senate, though it has little chance of becoming law.
In 2007 GOOGLE launched, to great fanfare, their Renewable Energy Cheaper than Coal research project (RE<C was the catchy equation). Great idea in the abstract. Hows that working out for Google? They cancelled the project last fall.
Just so you know, there is SOLID, IRREFUTABLE evidence that the doubling of human average lifespans over the last 200 years is DIRECTLY attributable to our use of fossil fuels.
Virtually all of the USHCN warming since 1973 appears to be the result of adjustments NOAA has made to the data, mainly in the 1995-97 timeframe.
OH, and note that besides the Urban Heat Island Effect, there’s also (apparently) a Planting and Tending Vegetation in Otherwise Arid Regions cooling effect!
Only response to the Tulsa thing is I really hate the term hate charges. If they committed murder they should give them the chair. Hate crimes are a stupid term invented to make libs feel good. Most all first degree murder is hate, why does anyone need to prove a racial component? And yes I feel the same way when a black guy takes the shots also.
I will accept the verdict of the court and the penalty they hand down.
I hold the same views with regards the Zimmerman case, if he’s tried and found guilty.
Oklahoma has a death penalty and they know how to use it.
If a jury of their peers sentences the killers to death, does that mean you aren’t going to cry foul at capital punishment, or praise a decade or more of silly appeals and judicial delays for the sake of delays?
FIFTY YEAR OLD MANURE SPREADER – $1 ( WASHINGTON , D.C. )
Fifty-year old manure spreader. Not sure of brand. Said to have been produced in Kenya. Used for a few years in Indonesia before being smuggled into the US via Hawaii. Of questionable pedigree. Does not appear to have ever been worked hard. Apparently it was pampered by various owners over the years. It doesn’t work very often, but when it does it can really sling the manure for amazing distances. I am hoping to retire the manure spreader next November.
I really don’t want it hanging around getting in the way. I would prefer a foreign buyer to relocate the manure spreader out of the country. I would be willing to trade it for a nicely framed copy of the United States Constitution.
Location: Currently being stored in the Oval Office of a big white house in Washington, D.C.
If there is a bright spot, it is that Obama and the Democrats, to their credit, are willing to break their pledge. They effectively raised future taxes on people making less than $250,000 when they passed the excise tax on high-value health- insurance plans as part of health-care reform, for instance…
________________
If you are a smoker, you are already paying higher taxes thanks to Obama. That “no tax increase…” promise was about as reliable as any other of Obama’s promises.
If a jury of their peers sentences the killers to death, does that mean you aren’t going to cry foul at capital punishment, or praise a decade or more of silly appeals and judicial delays for the sake of delays?
________________
Lao knows that he can’t win on this issue. Dead babies, not dead killers.
lao, should the death sentence against Mumia Abu-Jamal, which was handed down by a jury of his peers 30 years ago, have been carried out in accordance with the verdict of the jury and the laws of Pennsylvania?
lao, should Charles Manson have been sent to the gas chamber, as was the verdict of a California jury, or do you agree with the judicial activism which vacated his death sentence. This judicial activism was later overturned in a democratic California election through the will of the people.
lao says: April 14, 2012 at 7:00 am
————
While some might argue his mental state was diminished due to the murder of his father, you won’t find me among them.
I’m thinking I caught myself in a mistake with this post:
Bob Roberts says: April 13, 2012 at 10:30 pm
FARRAKHAN TELLS BLACKS — BREEDING WITH WHITES IS THE ‘END OF YOUR RACE’ Take a good look at him – he’s somewhere between 50 and 80 percent white himself. I’d love to see a DNA analysis.
—————
Of course when I said that last bit, I was looking at the recent photos supplied with the article.
While he expresses a consuming hatred for whites, like Michael Jackson, Farrakhan apparently desires to look as white as possible because he’s apparently done all he can to achieve that goal. If you look at older pictures of him you’ll see what I mean. Hates whites, wants to be more like them. What does that tell you?
In any case, I think I overestimated his “whiteness” due to his efforts to look white.
FARRAKHAN TELLS BLACKS — BREEDING WITH WHITES IS THE ‘END OF YOUR RACE’ Take a good look at him – he’s somewhere between 50 and 80 percent white himself. I’d love to see a DNA analysis.
Bob, same can be said with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
AC @7:24 asks: If a jury of their peers sentences the killers to death, does that mean you aren’t going to cry foul at capital punishment, or praise a decade or more of silly appeals and judicial delays for the sake of delays?
I will not cry foul at capital punishment if that’s the penalty. As for lawyers and their ways, you won’t find me expressing sympathy for them either, but reform of that system is probably beyond the powers of either side.
tony the kittycat sez: Note that (lao) added, “….if he’s tried and found GUILTY.”(emphasis added). Very telling.
While I am not following the legalities exactly, it’s my understanding that the Tulsa killers have already confessed their guilt. Zimmerman has not and that explains my qualification.
I’m not interested in efforts to turn this into a discussion on the merits or lack thereof, of the death penalty re other cases.
So at last we have a opinion (of sorts) from lao. While I am not following the legalities exactly, it’s my understanding that the Tulsa killers have already confessed their guilt. Zimmerman has not and that explains my qualification.
lao has determined Zimmerman is guilty (of something). That is fine, not knocking him for it, if anything I am congratulating him for finally making a decision.
If Zimmerman is found not guilty by a Florida jury, would you support a secondary federal prosecution as was done with the cops who arrested Rodney King?
“Re Zimmerman who has pleaded not guilty: I will accept the verdict of the court and, if he is found guilty, the penalty the court hands down.”
To reiterate the earlier point, lao will only accept the verdict IF he is found guilty – if found not guilty, lao, the quintessential racist who can only see thing in said terms, will joint the inevitable rioters, at least in spirit.
It will also go off on another internet hunt for a case where he thinks a “white” does something to a protected class, blithely ignoring the random acts of violence perpetrated by others.
Biden Earned $21,000 Last Year From the Secret Service but only paid taxes on $12,653 of the amount on his federal tax return. Most high-profile people in need of protection pay people to keep them safe. Government officials are allowed to have taxpayers pick up the tab. Biden is unique in that he actually gets paid by his bodyguards for the right to protect him.
Biden’s tax records list rental income of $20,900 from a “cottage” on is property, which is reportedly being leased by the Secret Service and paid for at a rate that could earn him even more money next year.
Biden took deductions for mortgage interest and taxes.
Nope I fully get what you said and I was attempting to issue an opinion on your behalf (since you won’t issue one of your own). The base question is “In the Zimmerman case, based on the available facts, do you believe 1. He should be charged with murder or manslaughter or nothing (or something else, illegal halitosis maybe?)? 2. Do you believe he is guilty (if you believe he should have been charged)?”
Quit evading with the “I will let others decide and be OK with that decision.” Sack up, make a choice. Pick a team, or do you root for refs in what ever sport you do watch? I get that you are saying you don’t care, but it is hard to buy with the constant thread count (btw 1000 count Egyptian cotton single ply sheets are to die for).
For the record, I personally believe he is not guilty (innocence, I ain’t splittin hairs over word choice) of murder, 1st, 2nd, or any other type. I similarly believe charbging with manslaughter is acceptable, but that he would be acquitted of that.
In the Tulsa thing, I don’t give a flying eff about the tan level of any of the involved parties (vic or perp). I think the killer(s) should be given one choice, regular or extra crispy? (actually I think they should have an internet voting thing and use the number of votes to determine voltage) I do not care in the slightest about state of mind on the Tulsa thing.
That was a clear and unequivocal statement. Open for discussion, but leaving no question about my stance on the two issues. I dare you to make a statement of your own that leaves no room for slinking out the back.
frankie, I have called the effort by people like you and bobby and AC, who want to examine, over and over and over again, the minute, and obviously incomplete details, of what happened between Martin and Zimmerman as Trial By Blog.
I think doing that is stupid and I have no interest in it because it is pointless.
A legal decision has been made. Zimmerman is charged with 2nd degree murder. Presumably he will go to trial. Presumably ALL the evidence the special prosecutor has, that led to those charges, will be presented. Will that evidence hold up in court? Who knows? I’m not going to try to second guess a judge and jury.
Zimmerman may be found not guilty, and if so, I will accept that verdict.
Zimmerman may be found guilty, and if so, I will accept that verdict.
If he is found guilty, I will accept whatever penalty may be levied against him.
If I’m trying this by blog for discussing the evidence in threads dedicated to discussion of the evidence, then how would you label the behavior of the NBC producer who doctored and spliced Zimmerman’s 911 call to conjure racist language out of thin air?
You have posted multiple comments on the details of what supposedly happened and based your conclusions on them. Claims that ALL the FACTS are publicly available for discussion are ignorant.
Trial By Blog OR Trial By Media is stupid and not conducive to Zimmerman getting a fair trial.
OK based on that response let me imitate lao at a baseball game. “Yay ump, way to call that ball. I hope neither team wins, I just wanna watch the ump make plate calls all night long.” Just what is your opinion of protector outside the shirt vs. inside the shirt for umpire crews?
This is not a trial (OK, trial by blog maybe, but still just opinions, no bearing in reality). This is an opinion based discourse. We all realize we are not the judge. We all realize we are not the jury (probably). The conclusions reached in discussing this are simply based on our opinions, not anything that has any standing anywhere.
Like I said, I could care less where you fall on the topic, I just wanted you to take a definable position. But I guess your position will be, I want someone else to decide so I do not have to.
We get that you will accept whatever verdict comes down. So do we (may not like it, agree with it, etc), unless we are planning to kill Zimmerman on a not guilty or spring him from the jail on a guilty. I really do not think anybody here has that level of commitment to the case.
Some would say there is a phrase for that kind of position, synonymous with Poultry Excrement.
lao says:
April 14, 2012 at 9:08 am
Ah, I believe I see your confusion. I was speaking about two different cases. To clarify:
Re the Tulsa killers (who have confessed): I will accept the verdict of the court and the penalty they hand down.
Re Zimmerman who has pleaded not guilty: I will accept the verdict of the court and, if he is found guilty, the penalty the court hands down.
————–
’nuff said!
SR says: April 14, 2012 at 8:31 am
————————
Indeed, for racists on both sides of the color line, it’s likely that they have a little something, at least, mixed in.
lao says: April 14, 2012 at 12:49 pm
Claims that ALL the FACTS are publicly available for discussion are ignorant.
————–
True. Only an idiot would believe the “facts” even now being manufactured by the prosecution, the racists, including Obama, are public yet. How can they be public when they don’t yet exist?
AC says: April 14, 2012 at 12:40 pm
—————
But lao still hasn’t explained, due to the fact we are the ones saying no trial is necessary because Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin, how it is we’re the ones engaging in “trial by blog”. How can we be doing that if in fact it’s our position no trial is necessary?
lao says: April 14, 2012 at 9:23 am
Bill would define holding hands, kissing as “gateway sexual activity”
———————–
I would go so far as to say that depending on an “abstinence only” policy would be an error.
But, from lao’s link,
Planned Parenthood said that allowing state government to define local sex education curriculum could backfire.
This is the opposite of the position they take when they encourage LGBTQ friendly curricula. As long as it’s the message they want to promote, they’re all for government stepping in and deciding. It’s only when the message is personal responsibility, waiting until you’re ready for the burdens and responsibilities that come with sex, that suddenly government intervention is bad.
As with lao, the inconsistency is one of my big issues.
lao says: April 14, 2012 at 12:49 pm
————
The physical evidence, the eyewitness to the vicious beating Martin was dishing out to Zimmerman, the actual 911 calls and Zimmerman’s honest account that matches all of the evidence 100% is pretty hard to ignore, lao.
So far the only new “facts” brought out by the prosecution have been lies – claims he was engaging in profiling, implications we don’t know who started the physical confrontation between them, really as more than one seasoned lawyer has stated at this point, the affidavit against Zimmerman is laughable. It’s fairly clear the only reason we’re going to go through this joke of a trial is to help give the community breathing space due to the racism that has been injected by the usual suspects, from Obama and Holder on down.
Mother thought birth was bowel movement Anitra Hicks, 18, was indicted on charges in connection with throwing her newborn baby in the trash. She said she didn’t hurt her baby and didn’t even know she was pregnant.
The tragic story started on July 6, 2010 with reports that the boy was missing after falling in the Battery in downtown Charleston. Authorities launched a massive search for the boy who was actually never in the water. Williams, and his live-in girlfriend, Trotman, were arrested.
TrickleUpPolitics says: April 14, 2012 at 1:51 pm
————–
You make a great point or two. But your statement that you leave when he shows up and the fun starts – could that be just what he wants? Don’t leave, just don’t take part & don’t bother to read his filth or the answers to it.
You’re right, of course – we should all take a vow to just ignore lao because he’s here for the attention. It’s the only way he can justify his pathetic so-called life. Well, losing time and time again to us and waiting for his pots to soak.
As recommended by my sponsor:
Hi, my name is FrankW and I have a problem with people that can not or will not decide. I realize the problem is me and not the poor undecideables. I need to acknowledge there is a power greater than myself, his name is Alex Trebek. I also need to take responsibility for myself and not try to assist others who are incapable of deciding. “I’m a man, but I can change, if I have to, I guess.”
I can’t let a moonbat have the last word, at least not when it’s point/counterpoint. Eric/Gunther spewing stupidity is another matter. I do have respect for lao for at least engaging in point/counterpoint rather than just derailing threads with left-wing slogans.
What fuzzy didn’t notice is that we have significant disagreements among ourselves without lao being involved. Unlike many leftist sites, particularly one which calls itself controversy.freeforums.org, we allow opinions other than our own to be expressed here – or lao would not appear here, ever. Echo chamber? HARDLY. For that go to democratic underground.
AC, you’re just fooling yourself that lao is debating you point/counterpoint. He makes a fool of all of you with his malicious bullshit. Oh, and it’s boring too.
re TUP @ 6:38 am. Too funny, particularly in light of the pep rally header. Even the losing teams cry “we are #1″.
Thanks TUP for acknowledging that I often DO make a fool of some the flakes who regularly post here. bobby and stanwee are the two best candidates in that regard.
AC is one of the few who post here who earns a certain amount of respect from me.
TUP, there was a time when you seemed to be happy to engage me in discussion. I can’t remember when you withdrew but I’m guessing I must have flogged you with reality so bad you couldn’t handle it. When your own convictions and beliefs fail the test of someone willing to confront you with the truth, it’s going to require adjustment.
Now I’m off to complete a first aid course. I’ll happily assist anyone in that regard, and I won’t ask their political affiliation before I do.
TrickleUpPolitics says: April 15, 2012 at 6:38 am
———-
You’re mistaken if anyone believes they’re having an honest, adult debate with lao. He proved, long ago, he’s completely unable to have honest, adult debates.
He makes a fool of HIMSELF with his malicious bullshit.
Of course, he can’t see it, but some of us do. Not sure why you’ve decided to be a cheerleader for him. Just look at how he repays you:
TUP, there was a time when you seemed to be happy to engage me in discussion. I can’t remember when you withdrew but I’m guessing I must have flogged you with reality so bad you couldn’t handle it. When your own convictions and beliefs fail the test of someone willing to confront you with the truth, it’s going to require adjustment.
Too bad he can’t see himself in his own remarks, eh?
When I see a thread that goes, “StanInTexas, lao, StanInTexas, lao, lao, Bob Roberts, Bob Roberts, Bob Roberts, lao, StanInTexas, lao, StanInTexas, lao…” I avoid it.
The back and forth is nonsense – lao is a liar and is only here to disrupt.
TrickleUpPolitics says: April 15, 2012 at 6:38 am
and
Just sayin’ says: April 15, 2012 at 9:01 am
—————-
Deception, at least successful deception, is a cooperative process.
Attempted deception, what lao is famous for, serves no purpose. To be a success the deception must be accepted by those intended to be deceived. However, lao consistently demonstrates his inability to incorporate new information by returning here and attempting to deceive us over and over. We don’t ask him to do so. We tried ignoring him. Now we just suffer his presence with a smile and a shake of our heads. Some of us, after we’ve had our say about things that matter, do admittedly waste our time trying to see if we can get any honesty or logic from him. As even FuzzyRider admits, we have a fairly consistent record of failure on that endeavor.
Where FuzzyRider gets it wrong is his belief that lao is “the number one” anything. Because lao comes in dead last, obviously, every time. FuzzyRider equates lao to a leader (a fictional one, but a leader nonetheless) and I suppose comments like those above by Just sayin’ and TrickleUpPolitics may help further such misconceptions, but in truth lao reveals himself, in each post, as a follower of the worst kind. The only aspects of Emmanuel Goldstein that comes close to lao is the fact he’s a complete fabrication, a propaganda tool, a lie from the word go.
So no, lao is no Emmanuel Goldstein, except in that one way perhaps.
Certainly any thread that features one or more comments by lao is ripe for being skipped over.
The back and forth is nonsense – lao is a liar and is only here to disrupt.
————-
Correct. But, as I said, we tried ignoring him. It didn’t work.
I agree, though, perhaps it’s time to start ignoring him again. Calling him out when he lies and confronting him with facts, truth and logic – clearly none of that is working.
But past experience suggests that ignoring him won’t work either and, sooner or later, he will say something so absurd someone will respond with the truth, not that it will do much good with respect to getting lao to understand or admit the truth.
Lao is very likely a paid troll. He doesn’t debate – he disagrees, disrupts, distorts, dismisses, etc. He shows up every time his name is mentioned and he hasn’t yet contributed anything good to the conversation.
Lao has a big ego. I don’t engage him because “he flogged me” but because arguing with a lib troll is an exercise in frustration AND IT’S BORING. I’ve got better things to do with my time.
Scroll back to the racial profiling thread, AKA “Placing Black Hoodlums Above the Law” and see who posted more misinformation and lies and who posted more accurate links and facts.
Just sayin’ says: April 15, 2012 at 9:49 am
————-
Your logic is flawless. I don’t disagree with you at all. Way back when attempts were made to just ignore him but they did not work – he did not leave. As you say, likely because he’s paid to bother us and disrupt our discussions, to distract us from important things by repeatedly making a total idiot of himself.
TrickleUpPolitics says: April 15, 2012 at 12:15 pm
————
More of us – including me – should no doubt follow your example. Attempting to communicate with one so obviously removed from reality, so ready to lie as he ALWAYS demonstrates, is indeed an exercise in futility.
FuzzyRider says: April 15, 2012 at 11:18 am
———–
Kicking lao around has become second nature to us at this point. We tried ignoring him. Didn’t work. We tried engaging him. He hasn’t the mental capacity to be engaged. We tried abusing him. He enjoys it so much he begs for more. I don’t know – maybe it is time to go back to ignoring him, unless you have some other CONSTRUCTIVE suggestion.
Funny you said that – I wondered a few times early on if lao was Blounts way of injecting the devil’s advocate here but quickly dismissed that thought. That’s a trick the left plays, not the right. His own posts suggest lao is indeed a paid provocateur, though only a fool would pay this one. If they are paying him they’re getting what they deserve – precious little!
One constructive suggestion- avoid ad hominem attacks and name calling, which tends to only elevate the recipient while negating any positive arguments of the poster.
If you choose to ignore someone, simply do so. Completely. No response whatsoever, for any reason. I don’t deem this a justifiable action unless a poster is totally abusive. Lao may be, in your view, obtuse, but if your arguments are overwhelmingly good that should become apparent to anyone following the thread! If your ultimate goal is to persuade as many as possible, this should be sufficient.
Arguing with Liberals/Trolls
“It’s like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock over the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it’s victorious.” Anon.
FuzzyRider says: April 15, 2012 at 4:24 pm
————-
Yep, I agree. Kicking him around just became something to do while my other machines were doing tedious work (heavy video/still image/audio processing) but you are right.
But one thing: I don’t intend to persuade some people – some people prove time and time again they’re beyond reaching, beyond hope. I don’t mean that in a negative emotional way, just stating a fact that’s been demonstrated time & time again.
TrickleUpPolitics says: April 15, 2012 at 8:26 pm
————–
As we have noted, with lao playing the part of the pigeon time and time again. So you see, ignoring him doesn’t work – he still craps all over the board and knocks over the pieces and, to him, that’s a victory. Nobody understands why – we are all motivated by positive things, not the negative stuff he’s all about.
Awesome T-Shit – me wantie!
Did you know
the poorest tax payer has a 200% tax rate?
Also,
the white house used bad data and fictional characters to justify “the Buffett Rule”
Yes, liberalism is a mental disorder since it forces one to avoid reality.
Hey lao, study the graphic at the top of this thread.
Try your best to understand it, even though I admit you probably aren’t up to the task.
OBAMA FAMILY TAX SHELTER
FIRST FAMILY TRANSFERS WEALTH, AVOIDS TAXES
There is nothing illegal about the president’s taking advantage of this tax shelter, but it does raise eyebrows given that he has lamented the myriad tax exemptions used by the wealthy—“millionaires and billionaires” – like himself—to pay less in taxes. He has yet to propose a comprehensive plan to reform the byzantine tax code.
The Obamas paid a total federal tax rate of 20.5 percent on a gross adjusted income $789,674, which would typically fall within the top federal rate of 35 percent. According to an analysis of the president’s tax return, Obama may have paid a lower rate than his secretary despite making more than eight times as much money as she did.
ROMNEY: Obama is coming for your guns! Tell us something we didn’t already know.
OBAMANOMICS:
STOCKS: Worst week of year. There is a way to fix this: NOBAMA 2012!
Department of Labor playing favorites.
But Carl Fillichio, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis’ top communications advisor, circulated a memo earlier this week to interested media informing them that everybody is being required to re-submit their credentials requests.
Fillichio reminded participants that there are only 20-30 seats available and that priority will be given by DOL in selecting participants to those that “are primarily journalistic enterprises.”
He also offered a one-sentence assurance that “the department will not consider editorial or political viewpoints in making credentialing decisions.”
Pull the other two while you’re down there.
San Francisco spends $205,075 to move one shrub out of the way of a stimulus project
Naturally, this egregious waste of money is Bush’s fault.
Guy goes into a bar in Louisiana where there’s a robot bartender!
The robot says, “What will you have?”
The guy says, “Whiskey.”
The robot brings back his drink and says to the man, “What’s your IQ?”
The guy says, “168.”
The robot then proceeds to talk about physics, space, exploration and medical technology.
The guy leaves, . . . but he is curious . . . So he goes back into the bar.
The robot bartender says, “What will you have?”
The guy says, “Whiskey.”
Again, the robot brings the man his drink and says, “What’s your IQ?”
The guy says, “100.”
The robot then starts to talk about Nascar, Budweiser, the Saints and LSU Tigers
The guy leaves, but finds this very interesting, so he thinks he will try it one more time.
He goes back into the bar.
The robot says, “What will you have?”
The guy says, “Whiskey,” and the robot brings him his whiskey.
The robot then says, “What’s your IQ?
The guy says, “Uh, about 50.”
The robot leans in real close and says,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
“So, . . . you people still happy with Barack Obama?”
My other favorite aimed at libtards is:
“I can explain it to you but I can’t understand it for you.”
Good one, Jimbo.
I heard a variant, as a musician’s joke, and the punch line was:
So what kind of sticks you use?
Politically Prostituting NASA
NASA Administrator Charles Bolden is a graduate of the Naval Academy, a retired, highly decorated Marine major general, and a former astronaut. Bolden is also a dutiful politician.
NASA’s website cites the agency’s aim to “pioneer the future in space exploration and aeronautic research” and outlines its “vision”: “To reach for new heights and reveal the unknown so that what we do and learn will benefit all humankind.”
There is no mention anywhere on the NASA site of getting involved international politics, such as improving relations with Islam, or promoting the global warming scam but both are on its agenda.
Bolden demonstrated that NASA’s mission had radically changed a year after he was named administrator when he said during an interview with Al Jazeera, the Arabic language news network. Under Bolden, NASA’s is being politicized and its “foremost” mission is to improve relations with the Muslim world, and not space exploration or aeronautic research.
He told Al Jazeera that he was “ordered” to effectively forget NASA’s historic mission of space pioneering, etc. and to adopt a totally new and markedly different goal. As Bolden admitted to the voice of Islam, “Obama wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science. . . and math and engineering.”
At the behest of his boss, Bolden was abandoning NASA’s position as the world’s pre-eminent scientific body in order to serve “foremost” as cheerleaders for ancient Muslim achievements, that is, to fulfill Barack Hussein Obama’s political ambition to suck up to Islam and help Muslims “feel good” about themselves.
That extreme departure contradicted the president’s own words spoken in March, 2009.
At that time, he said, “Let’s be clear: promoting science isn’t just about providing resources–it is also about protecting free and open inquiry. It is about letting scientists . . . do their jobs, . . . It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda–and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology.”
Except when those decisions and facts conflict with Obama’s ideology.
NASA has again departed from its mission on another Obama pet issue–the lie of anthropogenic global warming. . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=21481.)
FARRAKHAN TELLS BLACKS — BREEDING WITH WHITES IS THE ‘END OF YOUR RACE’ Take a good look at him – he’s somewhere between 50 and 80 percent white himself. I’d love to see a DNA analysis.
‘MY GOD WILL WIPE THIS COUNTRY FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH’: THE REAL LOUIS FARRAKHAN IN HIS OWN WORDS And Obama was claiming that white veterans were a threat?
Dr. 9 says: April 13, 2012 at 8:49 pm
—————-
There is ample evidence the decision to avoid reality is a deliberate, conscious one.
Ask lao, he’ll avoid answering.
Obama has something in common with lao – ready, aim, shoot self!
Irony: Mitt Romney warns NRA against an ‘unrestrained’ second-term Obama
Says the moonbat who did take away people’s guns and stomped all over their right to carry.
Dershowitz isn’t the only one questioning the Zimmerman affidavit.
Some points:
This affidavit is not law, it is agitprop: invoking, for example, the explosive term “profiled” but carefully avoiding any discussion of what it means and failing to note that (a) there is no evidence of racial profiling, and (b) absent an invidious racial component there is nothing wrong with profiling (indeed, we want police to do it so that innocent people don’t get hassled).
You listening, lao?
Additional points:
1) The dispatcher did not TELL Zimmerman not to follow Martin, but even if he had, Zimmerman was under no requirement to listen even though, if you follow the 911 tape, you find he apparently did – just after the dispatcher suggested (did not DEMAND, he SUGGESTED) Zimmerman not follow Martin, Zimmerman began to return to his vehicle.
2) Failure to share Zimmerman’s statements suggests there’s information in them that is damaging to the prosecution. The affidavit also fails to mention the physical evidence: Zimmerman’s injuries. Both of these help explain why the prosecutor chose not to let a jury decide whether or not to go forward.
3) The affidavit stays away from the tricky question regarding who started the physical altercation – all the evidence suggests Martin did and any evidence to the contrary should have been clearly laid out in the affidavit, yet it was not, suggesting there is no such evidence.
4) As the source states:
“Zimmerman confronted Martin [note the active voice is used when nothing criminal is claimed -- "confronting" someone is not a crime] and a struggle ensued” [as if the struggle, presumably meaning the physical encounter, happened spontaneously -- no one is identified as initiating it]. If I ask, “What are you doing?” and you respond by punching me in the nose, and this leads us to grapple, my having confronted you does not alter the fact that you are responsible for the ensuing struggle.
This is a point I made earlier. There is no evidence Zimmerman confronted Martin – in fact the evidence suggests the opposite.
5) A key lie in the affidavit has to do with trying to falsely establish that Martin called for help. Both Zimmerman’s own account and the one actual eyewitness have already clearly established that Zimmerman was on the ground, calling for help, while Martin was trying to murder him. Here again we see why the prosecutor decided not to send this to a jury – the forensics will show that Zimmerman’s account is correct – that Martin was on top of him and attempting to murder him when Zimmerman shot him.
6) Prosecutors actually have to identify a specific charge and present evidence that establishes probable cause for each essential element the legislature has prescribed in defining that charge.
The affidavit contains NO probable cause for ANY essential element.
…one thing I can say with confidence is that there is not probable cause in that affidavit for the charge the prosecutor has selected, second-degree murder. It requires proof of depraved indifference to human life. Nothing in the affidavit, and nothing we otherwise know about Zimmerman, indicates such a state of mind — and it’s really not close.
At best the prosecutor is hoping that the jury will come back with a lesser included offense, it seems, if this even makes it to trial. I’m certain they’re hoping for a plea bargain with Zimmerman.
Even the following charges would be a reach, under the circumstances:
Florida law makes causing the death of a person under the age of 18 manslaughter, provided there has been “culpable negligence.” It also criminalizes as manslaughter the “unnecessary killing” of a person in order to resist or prevent that person’s violation of law (e.g., the use of lethal force to repel a clearly non-lethal threat).
Neither of these charges would have been a slam-dunk; indeed, they’d be losers if Zimmerman shot because he was justifiably in fear of his life.
And, clearly, he did!
If I were a cynic, I’d say that an ambitious special prosecutor — exploiting the rabble-rousing of the U.S. attorney general and the racial grievance industry — filed an exceedingly serious charge for which she lacks evidence, second degree murder, in order to bask in the mob’s adulation while pressuring Zimmerman to plead guilty to a lesser charge, manslaughter, on which the special prosecutor runs a high risk of losing if Zimmerman forces a trial.
How ’bout This One, Lads:
‘Miss Philippines 2011′ is Shamcey Supsup
You got to love it when the left gets a taste of their own medicine!
Arthur Sulzberger Jr., a poster boy for “the 1%”.
Then there’s this.
As the baby boomers retire and health costs continue to grow, more revenues will be needed. For Democrats who have spent the last decade convincing members of the middle class that they will forever be exempt from tax increases, thats going to be a tough about-face to make.
If there is a bright spot, it is that Obama and the Democrats, to their credit, are willing to break their pledge. They effectively raised future taxes on people making less than $250,000 when they passed the excise tax on high-value health- insurance plans as part of health-care reform, for instance. During the debate on Obamacare there were numerous denials that taxes would be raised on the middle class.” NOW, it turns out that those claims are inoperative…and the tax increases are actually a feature, not a bug! AND, they are ALL lying! They are willing to break their pledge that only the rich will pay increased taxes!…and THAT is a feature now, not a bug!
Unbelievable…the double talk, sophistry, outright lying and slippery bad faith of the left cannot be overstated.
Here, lao is our example of this fact.
The Liberal Misappropriation of a Conservative President Of all the unlikely developments in American politics over the last two decades, the most astonishing is this: liberals suddenly love Ronald Reagan. They have taken to celebrating certain virtues they claim Reagan possessed—virtues they believe are absent from the conservative body politic today—while looking back with nostalgia at the supposed civility of the political struggles of the 1980s.
Obama: Let’s Call Tax Plan the ‘Reagan Rule’ President Barack Obama trod new ground in invoking Republican Party icon Ronald Reagan to pitch his proposal to raise taxes on the wealthy. Mr. Obama puckishly offered Wednesday to rename his proposal, currently called the “Buffett rule” after billionaire investor Warren Buffett, the “Reagan rule” if that might help persuade Republicans to support it.
President Obama: Quoting Reagan out of context The world has gone topsy-turvy when a Democratic president approvingly cites Ronald Reagan on tax policy — and even suggests naming his legislative proposal after the Republican icon, since, as Obama put it, he “traveled across the country pushing for the same concept.”
Obama is talking about the so-called “Buffett Rule,” which seeks to raise the taxes of the super wealthy so they don’t pay less than middle-class Americans. We have examined this concept earlier and concluded it was more of a “political argument” than an actual problem. (White House documents show just 22,000 wealthy households make more than $1 million and pay less than 15 percent of their income in taxes.) But no matter — a version is coming up for a vote next week in the Senate, though it has little chance of becoming law.
Reagan Vs. Obama – Social Economics 101
You almost have to feel sorry for the Democrats. I said ‘almost’…
Here they are, a once great party, now down to where hate, crony-capitalism, and vote fraud are their only route to re-election.
Obama’s dwindling hope.
In 2007 GOOGLE launched, to great fanfare, their Renewable Energy Cheaper than Coal research project (RE<C was the catchy equation). Great idea in the abstract. Hows that working out for Google? They cancelled the project last fall.
I was wondering how they were going to explain the current global cooling trend while tying it in to an anthropogenic cause related to fossil fuels.
Now I know.
Just so you know, there is SOLID, IRREFUTABLE evidence that the doubling of human average lifespans over the last 200 years is DIRECTLY attributable to our use of fossil fuels.
Who would have guessed it?
Global warming IS man made! Just not in the way some claim.
Here is the punch line:
Virtually all of the USHCN warming since 1973 appears to be the result of adjustments NOAA has made to the data, mainly in the 1995-97 timeframe.
OH, and note that besides the Urban Heat Island Effect, there’s also (apparently) a Planting and Tending Vegetation in Otherwise Arid Regions cooling effect!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/us-secret-service-agents-recalled-from-colombia/2012/04/13/gIQAEdW9FT_story.html
U.S. Secret Service agents leave Colombia over prostitution inquiry
My first thought is: Given the penchant for the service to protect the principal (both physically and via reputation) maybe they are taking an embarrassing bullet for team bammy.
“Justin Gibson wants Larry Conners fired for doing his job”
http://lgfonevolution.blogspot.pt/2012/04/justin-gibson-wants-larry-conners-fired.html
They’re alleging sex with a woman, so that rules Obummer out.
Murder, hate crime charges in Tulsa shooting spree
OBAMA DOESN’T QUALIFY FOR OWN ‘BUFFETT RULE’…
http://nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/obama-releases-taxes-does-not-qualify-for-buffett-rule-20120413
If murder charges are proven, both men should go to death row.
lao, do you care to join me in calling for capital punishment for the perpetrators of this heinous and senseless crime spree?
Only response to the Tulsa thing is I really hate the term hate charges. If they committed murder they should give them the chair. Hate crimes are a stupid term invented to make libs feel good. Most all first degree murder is hate, why does anyone need to prove a racial component? And yes I feel the same way when a black guy takes the shots also.
President Obama’s Secretary Paid Higher Tax Rate Than He Did
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/04/president-obamas-secretary-paid-higher-tax-rate-than-he-did/
I will accept the verdict of the court and the penalty they hand down.
I hold the same views with regards the Zimmerman case, if he’s tried and found guilty.
Oklahoma has a death penalty and they know how to use it.
If a jury of their peers sentences the killers to death, does that mean you aren’t going to cry foul at capital punishment, or praise a decade or more of silly appeals and judicial delays for the sake of delays?
FOR SALE:
FIFTY YEAR OLD MANURE SPREADER – $1 ( WASHINGTON , D.C. )
Fifty-year old manure spreader. Not sure of brand. Said to have been produced in Kenya. Used for a few years in Indonesia before being smuggled into the US via Hawaii. Of questionable pedigree. Does not appear to have ever been worked hard. Apparently it was pampered by various owners over the years. It doesn’t work very often, but when it does it can really sling the manure for amazing distances. I am hoping to retire the manure spreader next November.
I really don’t want it hanging around getting in the way. I would prefer a foreign buyer to relocate the manure spreader out of the country. I would be willing to trade it for a nicely framed copy of the United States Constitution.
Location: Currently being stored in the Oval Office of a big white house in Washington, D.C.
If there is a bright spot, it is that Obama and the Democrats, to their credit, are willing to break their pledge. They effectively raised future taxes on people making less than $250,000 when they passed the excise tax on high-value health- insurance plans as part of health-care reform, for instance…
________________
If you are a smoker, you are already paying higher taxes thanks to Obama. That “no tax increase…” promise was about as reliable as any other of Obama’s promises.
If a jury of their peers sentences the killers to death, does that mean you aren’t going to cry foul at capital punishment, or praise a decade or more of silly appeals and judicial delays for the sake of delays?
________________
Lao knows that he can’t win on this issue. Dead babies, not dead killers.
RE: lao at April 14, 2012 at 7:20 am:
Loud Angry Obfuscator trips over his own preconceived notions and reveals his biased agenda with this:
“I will accept the verdict of the court and the penalty they hand down.
I hold the same views with regards the Zimmerman case, if he’s tried and found guilty.”
Note that Loud And Obnoxious added, “…….if he’s tried and found GUILTY.”(emphasis added)
Very telling.
Loopy Loony Liberals, repeat after me:
“I will accept the verdict of the court and the penalty they hand down.
I hold the same views with regards to Mumia Abu Jamal, who is a racist cop-killer who confessed, was tried and found guilty.”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
lao, should the death sentence against Mumia Abu-Jamal, which was handed down by a jury of his peers 30 years ago, have been carried out in accordance with the verdict of the jury and the laws of Pennsylvania?
Yes or no.
lao, should Charles Manson have been sent to the gas chamber, as was the verdict of a California jury, or do you agree with the judicial activism which vacated his death sentence. This judicial activism was later overturned in a democratic California election through the will of the people.
Yes or no.
BTW, do we really give a flying f#ck what that Canadian whack job “accepts”?
His arrogance is stunning…..”I will accept…..”
Yea, “as if”. Who the f#ck cares?
Loopy Loony Lemming-Like Lefties are never gonna “like” us – and we’re never gonna “convince” them.
It’s the usual nonsense, with Loud And Obnoxious trying to ‘jack the thread and arrogantly claim to be the moderator and arbitrator.
To put it as tactfully and diplomatically as this deserves: “F#ck him”.
The ultimate fate of moonbats/liberals, who believe the world is overpopulated and in need of “purification”.
lao says: April 14, 2012 at 7:00 am
————
While some might argue his mental state was diminished due to the murder of his father, you won’t find me among them.
I’m thinking I caught myself in a mistake with this post:
Bob Roberts says: April 13, 2012 at 10:30 pm
FARRAKHAN TELLS BLACKS — BREEDING WITH WHITES IS THE ‘END OF YOUR RACE’ Take a good look at him – he’s somewhere between 50 and 80 percent white himself. I’d love to see a DNA analysis.
—————
Of course when I said that last bit, I was looking at the recent photos supplied with the article.
While he expresses a consuming hatred for whites, like Michael Jackson, Farrakhan apparently desires to look as white as possible because he’s apparently done all he can to achieve that goal. If you look at older pictures of him you’ll see what I mean. Hates whites, wants to be more like them. What does that tell you?
In any case, I think I overestimated his “whiteness” due to his efforts to look white.
Survivors of Soviet communism speak with Glenn Beck
FARRAKHAN TELLS BLACKS — BREEDING WITH WHITES IS THE ‘END OF YOUR RACE’ Take a good look at him – he’s somewhere between 50 and 80 percent white himself. I’d love to see a DNA analysis.
Bob, same can be said with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
AC @7:24 asks: If a jury of their peers sentences the killers to death, does that mean you aren’t going to cry foul at capital punishment, or praise a decade or more of silly appeals and judicial delays for the sake of delays?
I will not cry foul at capital punishment if that’s the penalty. As for lawyers and their ways, you won’t find me expressing sympathy for them either, but reform of that system is probably beyond the powers of either side.
tony the kittycat sez: Note that (lao) added, “….if he’s tried and found GUILTY.”(emphasis added). Very telling.
While I am not following the legalities exactly, it’s my understanding that the Tulsa killers have already confessed their guilt. Zimmerman has not and that explains my qualification.
I’m not interested in efforts to turn this into a discussion on the merits or lack thereof, of the death penalty re other cases.
RE: Bob Roberts at April 14, 2012 at 8:05 am:
Reminds me of that classic Dead Milkmen tune from the “Eat Your Paisley” album, “The Thing That Only Eats Hippies”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpJzJucTcV8
“….it ate Stills and Nash before they could shout
Then it chewed on David Crosby but it SPIT HIM OUT!!!
All the punks are gonna scream “yippeee!”
‘Cause it’s the thing that only eats hippies…..”
Former TSA chief denounces Gropenfuhrer John Pistole’s ineffective three ring circus
So at last we have a opinion (of sorts) from lao. While I am not following the legalities exactly, it’s my understanding that the Tulsa killers have already confessed their guilt. Zimmerman has not and that explains my qualification.
lao has determined Zimmerman is guilty (of something). That is fine, not knocking him for it, if anything I am congratulating him for finally making a decision.
frankie, I simply stated the facts. Zimmerman has pleaded not guilty.
Re that case I said quite clearly I will accept the verdict of the court and the penalty they hand down.
How you manage to turn that into: lao has determined Zimmerman is guilty (of something). resides in the depths of your own mind.
Ah, I believe I see your confusion. I was speaking about two different cases. To clarify:
Re the Tulsa killers (who have confessed): I will accept the verdict of the court and the penalty they hand down.
Re Zimmerman who has pleaded not guilty: I will accept the verdict of the court and, if he is found guilty, the penalty the court hands down.
If Zimmerman is found not guilty by a Florida jury, would you support a secondary federal prosecution as was done with the cops who arrested Rodney King?
Bill would define holding hands, kissing as “gateway sexual activity”
Lao sez:
“Re Zimmerman who has pleaded not guilty: I will accept the verdict of the court and, if he is found guilty, the penalty the court hands down.”
To reiterate the earlier point, lao will only accept the verdict IF he is found guilty – if found not guilty, lao, the quintessential racist who can only see thing in said terms, will joint the inevitable rioters, at least in spirit.
It will also go off on another internet hunt for a case where he thinks a “white” does something to a protected class, blithely ignoring the random acts of violence perpetrated by others.
Thanks timmy for once again demonstrating your total ignorance. See my post @9:08.
“…….but what I MEANT to say was….”
HAHAHAHAHAHA……absolutely pathetic.
(yawn!)
Yea…for once we agree.
How “the 1%” does it!
Biden Earned $21,000 Last Year From the Secret Service but only paid taxes on $12,653 of the amount on his federal tax return. Most high-profile people in need of protection pay people to keep them safe. Government officials are allowed to have taxpayers pick up the tab. Biden is unique in that he actually gets paid by his bodyguards for the right to protect him.
Biden’s tax records list rental income of $20,900 from a “cottage” on is property, which is reportedly being leased by the Secret Service and paid for at a rate that could earn him even more money next year.
Biden took deductions for mortgage interest and taxes.
Nope I fully get what you said and I was attempting to issue an opinion on your behalf (since you won’t issue one of your own). The base question is “In the Zimmerman case, based on the available facts, do you believe 1. He should be charged with murder or manslaughter or nothing (or something else, illegal halitosis maybe?)? 2. Do you believe he is guilty (if you believe he should have been charged)?”
Quit evading with the “I will let others decide and be OK with that decision.” Sack up, make a choice. Pick a team, or do you root for refs in what ever sport you do watch? I get that you are saying you don’t care, but it is hard to buy with the constant thread count (btw 1000 count Egyptian cotton single ply sheets are to die for).
For the record, I personally believe he is not guilty (innocence, I ain’t splittin hairs over word choice) of murder, 1st, 2nd, or any other type. I similarly believe charbging with manslaughter is acceptable, but that he would be acquitted of that.
In the Tulsa thing, I don’t give a flying eff about the tan level of any of the involved parties (vic or perp). I think the killer(s) should be given one choice, regular or extra crispy? (actually I think they should have an internet voting thing and use the number of votes to determine voltage) I do not care in the slightest about state of mind on the Tulsa thing.
That was a clear and unequivocal statement. Open for discussion, but leaving no question about my stance on the two issues. I dare you to make a statement of your own that leaves no room for slinking out the back.
frankie, I have called the effort by people like you and bobby and AC, who want to examine, over and over and over again, the minute, and obviously incomplete details, of what happened between Martin and Zimmerman as Trial By Blog.
I think doing that is stupid and I have no interest in it because it is pointless.
A legal decision has been made. Zimmerman is charged with 2nd degree murder. Presumably he will go to trial. Presumably ALL the evidence the special prosecutor has, that led to those charges, will be presented. Will that evidence hold up in court? Who knows? I’m not going to try to second guess a judge and jury.
Zimmerman may be found not guilty, and if so, I will accept that verdict.
Zimmerman may be found guilty, and if so, I will accept that verdict.
If he is found guilty, I will accept whatever penalty may be levied against him.
If I’m trying this by blog for discussing the evidence in threads dedicated to discussion of the evidence, then how would you label the behavior of the NBC producer who doctored and spliced Zimmerman’s 911 call to conjure racist language out of thin air?
I’m not discriminating between the sides.
You have posted multiple comments on the details of what supposedly happened and based your conclusions on them. Claims that ALL the FACTS are publicly available for discussion are ignorant.
Trial By Blog OR Trial By Media is stupid and not conducive to Zimmerman getting a fair trial.
OK based on that response let me imitate lao at a baseball game. “Yay ump, way to call that ball. I hope neither team wins, I just wanna watch the ump make plate calls all night long.” Just what is your opinion of protector outside the shirt vs. inside the shirt for umpire crews?
This is not a trial (OK, trial by blog maybe, but still just opinions, no bearing in reality). This is an opinion based discourse. We all realize we are not the judge. We all realize we are not the jury (probably). The conclusions reached in discussing this are simply based on our opinions, not anything that has any standing anywhere.
Like I said, I could care less where you fall on the topic, I just wanted you to take a definable position. But I guess your position will be, I want someone else to decide so I do not have to.
We get that you will accept whatever verdict comes down. So do we (may not like it, agree with it, etc), unless we are planning to kill Zimmerman on a not guilty or spring him from the jail on a guilty. I really do not think anybody here has that level of commitment to the case.
Some would say there is a phrase for that kind of position, synonymous with Poultry Excrement.
lao says:
April 14, 2012 at 9:08 am
Ah, I believe I see your confusion. I was speaking about two different cases. To clarify:
Re the Tulsa killers (who have confessed): I will accept the verdict of the court and the penalty they hand down.
Re Zimmerman who has pleaded not guilty: I will accept the verdict of the court and, if he is found guilty, the penalty the court hands down.
————–
’nuff said!
SR says: April 14, 2012 at 8:31 am
————————
Indeed, for racists on both sides of the color line, it’s likely that they have a little something, at least, mixed in.
Here it is explained for slow people like lao.
lao says: April 14, 2012 at 12:49 pm
Claims that ALL the FACTS are publicly available for discussion are ignorant.
————–
True. Only an idiot would believe the “facts” even now being manufactured by the prosecution, the racists, including Obama, are public yet. How can they be public when they don’t yet exist?
AC says: April 14, 2012 at 12:40 pm
—————
But lao still hasn’t explained, due to the fact we are the ones saying no trial is necessary because Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin, how it is we’re the ones engaging in “trial by blog”. How can we be doing that if in fact it’s our position no trial is necessary?
lao says: April 14, 2012 at 9:23 am
Bill would define holding hands, kissing as “gateway sexual activity”
———————–
I would go so far as to say that depending on an “abstinence only” policy would be an error.
But, from lao’s link,
Planned Parenthood said that allowing state government to define local sex education curriculum could backfire.
This is the opposite of the position they take when they encourage LGBTQ friendly curricula. As long as it’s the message they want to promote, they’re all for government stepping in and deciding. It’s only when the message is personal responsibility, waiting until you’re ready for the burdens and responsibilities that come with sex, that suddenly government intervention is bad.
As with lao, the inconsistency is one of my big issues.
As soon as the back and forth starts with lao, I’m outta here. Why do you feed the troll? Are you really that interested in his opinions or approval?
lao says: April 14, 2012 at 12:49 pm
————
The physical evidence, the eyewitness to the vicious beating Martin was dishing out to Zimmerman, the actual 911 calls and Zimmerman’s honest account that matches all of the evidence 100% is pretty hard to ignore, lao.
So far the only new “facts” brought out by the prosecution have been lies – claims he was engaging in profiling, implications we don’t know who started the physical confrontation between them, really as more than one seasoned lawyer has stated at this point, the affidavit against Zimmerman is laughable. It’s fairly clear the only reason we’re going to go through this joke of a trial is to help give the community breathing space due to the racism that has been injected by the usual suspects, from Obama and Holder on down.
Mother thought birth was bowel movement Anitra Hicks, 18, was indicted on charges in connection with throwing her newborn baby in the trash. She said she didn’t hurt her baby and didn’t even know she was pregnant.
Man accused of dumping son’s body in trash can In February, Williams’ girlfriend, Grace Trotman pleaded guilty for her part in the death of 2-year-old Rodricus Williams.
The tragic story started on July 6, 2010 with reports that the boy was missing after falling in the Battery in downtown Charleston. Authorities launched a massive search for the boy who was actually never in the water. Williams, and his live-in girlfriend, Trotman, were arrested.
Lufkin mom abandons children at Easter party A Lufkin mother is arrested and charged with abandoning her children after she left them at an Easter party with strangers.
The children ages, 4 and seven, were left Sunday around 2 p.m. at a house on the 500 block of Culverhouse in Lufkin.
Lufkin Police said the mother identified as Asia Jones, 29 of Lufkin, left her kids at the party with no intent to return and pick them up.
———————
Can you guess the obvious common element?
TrickleUpPolitics says: April 14, 2012 at 1:51 pm
————–
You make a great point or two. But your statement that you leave when he shows up and the fun starts – could that be just what he wants? Don’t leave, just don’t take part & don’t bother to read his filth or the answers to it.
You’re right, of course – we should all take a vow to just ignore lao because he’s here for the attention. It’s the only way he can justify his pathetic so-called life. Well, losing time and time again to us and waiting for his pots to soak.
I know, I know, but sometimes I can’t help myself. I will investigate a 12 step program or something. Do they have a troll patch?
Lao is living rent free in your heads…
If he wasn’t here, yoo’d probably have to invent him,or things would be mighty dull in the echo chamber. Rock on, Lao!
lao sez”
“…Trial By Media is stupid and not conducive to Zimmerman getting a fair trial.”
Indeed, and exactly what you want.
As recommended by my sponsor:
Hi, my name is FrankW and I have a problem with people that can not or will not decide. I realize the problem is me and not the poor undecideables. I need to acknowledge there is a power greater than myself, his name is Alex Trebek. I also need to take responsibility for myself and not try to assist others who are incapable of deciding. “I’m a man, but I can change, if I have to, I guess.”
I can’t let a moonbat have the last word, at least not when it’s point/counterpoint. Eric/Gunther spewing stupidity is another matter. I do have respect for lao for at least engaging in point/counterpoint rather than just derailing threads with left-wing slogans.
FuzzyRider says: April 14, 2012 at 3:38 pm
———————-
controversy.freeforums.org
About anything, politics, religion, ethics, etc……
yeahRITE! Fuzzy headed, likely. Buddy of lao’s, likely. Tired of being alone over at controversy.freeforums.org
If you’re going to come around here, get a clue first, will you?
What fuzzy didn’t notice is that we have significant disagreements among ourselves without lao being involved. Unlike many leftist sites, particularly one which calls itself controversy.freeforums.org, we allow opinions other than our own to be expressed here – or lao would not appear here, ever. Echo chamber? HARDLY. For that go to democratic underground.
AC, you’re just fooling yourself that lao is debating you point/counterpoint. He makes a fool of all of you with his malicious bullshit. Oh, and it’s boring too.
re TUP @ 6:38 am. Too funny, particularly in light of the pep rally header. Even the losing teams cry “we are #1″.
Thanks TUP for acknowledging that I often DO make a fool of some the flakes who regularly post here. bobby and stanwee are the two best candidates in that regard.
AC is one of the few who post here who earns a certain amount of respect from me.
TUP, there was a time when you seemed to be happy to engage me in discussion. I can’t remember when you withdrew but I’m guessing I must have flogged you with reality so bad you couldn’t handle it. When your own convictions and beliefs fail the test of someone willing to confront you with the truth, it’s going to require adjustment.
Now I’m off to complete a first aid course. I’ll happily assist anyone in that regard, and I won’t ask their political affiliation before I do.
Happy trails.
TrickleUpPolitics says: April 15, 2012 at 6:38 am
———-
You’re mistaken if anyone believes they’re having an honest, adult debate with lao. He proved, long ago, he’s completely unable to have honest, adult debates.
He makes a fool of HIMSELF with his malicious bullshit.
Of course, he can’t see it, but some of us do. Not sure why you’ve decided to be a cheerleader for him. Just look at how he repays you:
TUP, there was a time when you seemed to be happy to engage me in discussion. I can’t remember when you withdrew but I’m guessing I must have flogged you with reality so bad you couldn’t handle it. When your own convictions and beliefs fail the test of someone willing to confront you with the truth, it’s going to require adjustment.
Too bad he can’t see himself in his own remarks, eh?
I agree with TUP!
When I see a thread that goes, “StanInTexas, lao, StanInTexas, lao, lao, Bob Roberts, Bob Roberts, Bob Roberts, lao, StanInTexas, lao, StanInTexas, lao…” I avoid it.
The back and forth is nonsense – lao is a liar and is only here to disrupt.
Lao is your Emmanuel Goldstein…
TrickleUpPolitics says: April 15, 2012 at 6:38 am
and
Just sayin’ says: April 15, 2012 at 9:01 am
—————-
Deception, at least successful deception, is a cooperative process.
Attempted deception, what lao is famous for, serves no purpose. To be a success the deception must be accepted by those intended to be deceived. However, lao consistently demonstrates his inability to incorporate new information by returning here and attempting to deceive us over and over. We don’t ask him to do so. We tried ignoring him. Now we just suffer his presence with a smile and a shake of our heads. Some of us, after we’ve had our say about things that matter, do admittedly waste our time trying to see if we can get any honesty or logic from him. As even FuzzyRider admits, we have a fairly consistent record of failure on that endeavor.
Where FuzzyRider gets it wrong is his belief that lao is “the number one” anything. Because lao comes in dead last, obviously, every time. FuzzyRider equates lao to a leader (a fictional one, but a leader nonetheless) and I suppose comments like those above by Just sayin’ and TrickleUpPolitics may help further such misconceptions, but in truth lao reveals himself, in each post, as a follower of the worst kind. The only aspects of Emmanuel Goldstein that comes close to lao is the fact he’s a complete fabrication, a propaganda tool, a lie from the word go.
So no, lao is no Emmanuel Goldstein, except in that one way perhaps.
Certainly any thread that features one or more comments by lao is ripe for being skipped over.
Just sayin’ says: April 15, 2012 at 9:01 am
The back and forth is nonsense – lao is a liar and is only here to disrupt.
————-
Correct. But, as I said, we tried ignoring him. It didn’t work.
I agree, though, perhaps it’s time to start ignoring him again. Calling him out when he lies and confronting him with facts, truth and logic – clearly none of that is working.
But past experience suggests that ignoring him won’t work either and, sooner or later, he will say something so absurd someone will respond with the truth, not that it will do much good with respect to getting lao to understand or admit the truth.
Bob Roberts,
Lao is very likely a paid troll. He doesn’t debate – he disagrees, disrupts, distorts, dismisses, etc. He shows up every time his name is mentioned and he hasn’t yet contributed anything good to the conversation.
Why give him the time of day?
Ignore him? You INVOKE hi!
I have seen many comment threads where Lao was not participating, yet comments were being addressed to him!
The PROCESS of ‘debate’ here is far more interesting (to me, anyhow) than the opinions being expressed…
Lao has a big ego. I don’t engage him because “he flogged me” but because arguing with a lib troll is an exercise in frustration AND IT’S BORING. I’ve got better things to do with my time.
Hilarious.
Scroll back to the racial profiling thread, AKA “Placing Black Hoodlums Above the Law” and see who posted more misinformation and lies and who posted more accurate links and facts.
Just sayin’ says: April 15, 2012 at 9:49 am
————-
Your logic is flawless. I don’t disagree with you at all. Way back when attempts were made to just ignore him but they did not work – he did not leave. As you say, likely because he’s paid to bother us and disrupt our discussions, to distract us from important things by repeatedly making a total idiot of himself.
TrickleUpPolitics says: April 15, 2012 at 12:15 pm
————
More of us – including me – should no doubt follow your example. Attempting to communicate with one so obviously removed from reality, so ready to lie as he ALWAYS demonstrates, is indeed an exercise in futility.
FuzzyRider says: April 15, 2012 at 11:18 am
———–
Kicking lao around has become second nature to us at this point. We tried ignoring him. Didn’t work. We tried engaging him. He hasn’t the mental capacity to be engaged. We tried abusing him. He enjoys it so much he begs for more. I don’t know – maybe it is time to go back to ignoring him, unless you have some other CONSTRUCTIVE suggestion.
Lao is your Emmanuel Goldstein
Funny you said that – I wondered a few times early on if lao was Blounts way of injecting the devil’s advocate here but quickly dismissed that thought. That’s a trick the left plays, not the right. His own posts suggest lao is indeed a paid provocateur, though only a fool would pay this one. If they are paying him they’re getting what they deserve – precious little!
(looks at the previous 3 posts and laughs and laughs and laughs)
Any more proof needed that irony is completely lost on bobby?
One constructive suggestion- avoid ad hominem attacks and name calling, which tends to only elevate the recipient while negating any positive arguments of the poster.
If you choose to ignore someone, simply do so. Completely. No response whatsoever, for any reason. I don’t deem this a justifiable action unless a poster is totally abusive. Lao may be, in your view, obtuse, but if your arguments are overwhelmingly good that should become apparent to anyone following the thread! If your ultimate goal is to persuade as many as possible, this should be sufficient.
All, of course, are welcome to come over to the Controversy website, we would love for it to take off!
http://controversy.freeforums.org/
Feel free to start a thread or respond to one, there are no ‘ideological tests’!
Arguing with Liberals/Trolls
“It’s like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock over the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it’s victorious.” Anon.
FuzzyRider says: April 15, 2012 at 4:24 pm
————-
Yep, I agree. Kicking him around just became something to do while my other machines were doing tedious work (heavy video/still image/audio processing) but you are right.
But one thing: I don’t intend to persuade some people – some people prove time and time again they’re beyond reaching, beyond hope. I don’t mean that in a negative emotional way, just stating a fact that’s been demonstrated time & time again.
TrickleUpPolitics says: April 15, 2012 at 8:26 pm
————–
As we have noted, with lao playing the part of the pigeon time and time again. So you see, ignoring him doesn’t work – he still craps all over the board and knocks over the pieces and, to him, that’s a victory. Nobody understands why – we are all motivated by positive things, not the negative stuff he’s all about.